[darcs-users] [patch360] Solve issue1923: bad source warning mechanism warns ab...

Adolfo Builes builes.adolfo at googlemail.com
Thu Sep 9 13:55:37 UTC 2010

Hi Eric,

>  _darcs/sources:
>    1. /some/expired/local/path
>    2. cant at reach-this-either.cz
>  foo at example.com:blah/_darcs/sources
>    3. /example/local/path/we/dont/control
>    4. http://other-bad-stuff
> What we want to catch are 1, 2 and 4.  Your issue1599 work catches 1,2,3,4
> with 3 being the case we had not considered.  The current version of the
> issue1923 patch eliminates 1 and 3, where actually what we really want to
> eliminate is just 3.
> See what I mean?  How can we address something like this?  Ideally, we'd
> know about where the source entries come from.  But maybe eliminating 1
> is just unfortunate, but acceptable collateral damage?

When we are loading the sources we know where they come from, in prefs
we have the following:

here <- parsehs `fmap` getPreffile (darcsdir ++ "/prefs/sources")
there <- (parsehs . lines . BC.unpack) `fmap`
                (gzFetchFilePS (repodir </> darcsdir </>
"prefs/sources") Cachable
                 `catchall` return B.empty)

Where "here" are the local sources and "there"  the remotes.

That's why I just apply the filter to "there".

btw, Are you able to reproduce the issue with Darcs repository ?


More information about the darcs-users mailing list